Thank you to my readers - for all the positive feedback.

I have been talking to some of the people on the "Lily: Bounty on the Bear" page on Facebook. And it has gotten a little heated, and I have been more than a little blunt. But, I have very little patience with these people. Feel free to join me in voicing your opinoins by logging on to http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=249&post=819&uid=189738334397617#post819.

In my first post on this subject - tried to present some of the best reasons why we should ask hunters not to kill the research bears. What I left out, is the fact that the owner of the Bounty page has dealt a very harsh blow to those of us who are trying to portray hunters as people who actually care about the animals we hunt, who understand that research is a vital tool in wildlife management, and that hunters are basically the front line of wildlife and habitat conservation.

Putting up such a page reflects badly on hunters and hunting. Using the word "Bounty" is not only controversial, but in this instance it is negative, and only adds to the bad taste this whole thing leaves in the mouth. It reflects badly on the hunters of the State of Minnesota, the whole huntng fraternity, and the hunting industry that I am part of.

If, as the owner of that page now states, it is in fact a "joke" it is an ill-conceived, ill-thought out joke, the effort of a self-serving, uncaring person, who appears to either not be able to understand the legislative proposal, or who just wants to get himself some publicity. Those who say they would like to kill one of these bears appear to want to gain some fame for killing a famous bear - not realizing that killing one of Dr. Rogers' semi-tame bears, would be akin to killing a bear in a cage. And look at the response the country star got when he killed a bear in a cage here in Minnesota. We (both hunters and Minnesotans) do not need any more negative publicity.

I'm trying to find out how many bears Dr. Rogers actually has collared, and how many bears there are in that one unit. I'm sure that his study bears make up a very small part of the bear population in Minnesota, that hunters can spare from hunting.

As a bear researcher myself, as well as a bear hunter and guide, I know how important every animal in a small research project is to that project. The fewer the number of animals in a study, the less reliable the conclusions and findings of that research project are. So, to kill one more of Dr. Rogers research bears, would deal a very big blow to his research efforts to understand the hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, yearly and lifetime biology and behavior of black bears.

I strongly urge the legislature to direct the commissioner of the MN DNR, to send a notice to all of the hunters who have permits to hunt bear in that one bear hunting unit, "asking" them not to kill the bears in Dr. Rogers research
project that are "wearing radio collars and have florescent tape attached to their collars".

This would not make it illegal to kill those bears, or to kill any bear with a collar, or to kill any bear anywhere in a legal bear hunting area in Minnesota.

This is not a ploy to be able to collar more bears - so that hunting of a large number of bears would not be allowed; or to eliminate bear hunting altogether. Hunting will probably always be needed as a mangement tool for bears here in
Minnesota.

I'd like to see "Lily" the owner of the page, answer the questions I posted on the "Discussions" page link on the "Bounty on the Bear" page on Facebook. But, he seems to be reluctant.

Please feel free to join me on Facebook and comment on this subject.

God bless,

T.R.